The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : House Votes to Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

House Votes to Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

By W. James Antle, III on 5.28.10 @ 11:23AM

The House has voted to move toward the repeal of the policy allowing homosexuals to serve in the military only if they remain silent about their sexual orientation. Adopted as an amendment to the annual Pentagon policy, the repeal would be allowed 60 days after a Pentagon report on the ramifications of this policy change is completed.

While the power to actually overturn don't ask, don't tell remains with military commanders, many see a congressional vote before the report is completed as political pressure. The Senate Armed Services Committee voted for a similar measure yesterday, largely along party lines with Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) voting with the Democrats and Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) voting with the Republicans.

View all comments (21) | Leave a comment

Warrior| 5.28.10 @ 12:28PM

Reminds me of a line from Full Metal Jacket where Lt. Lockhart rationalizes he'd rather be "in the rear with gear."

mt| 5.28.10 @ 1:25PM

sort of surprised that y'all hadn't been beating this at AS this week. National defense is really job 1 and this change won't improve our ability to defend itself.

Tom| 5.30.10 @ 5:32PM

Exactly. The last thing the military needs right now is a bunch of limp-wristed queens running around and claiming special privileges from the real men in uniform. We're at WAR Mr. President!!!

JP| 5.28.10 @ 2:00PM

Perhaps our military will evolve like the Royal Navy of the old British Empire. I think it was Winston Churchill, who 100 years ago quipped that the British Navy was nothing more than Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.

Dennis| 5.28.10 @ 2:22PM

Just like liberals, they vote on this just days before we remember those who fought/died for our great country. They couldn't even wait until the report comes in and they sure were not going to wait until after November when Democrats are swept out of office.

Oldefarte| 5.28.10 @ 2:43PM

Power to the LGBT, right? The homosexuals have ruined the Catholic Church, so now it's on to do battle with the US military. Happy days are here again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nate| 5.28.10 @ 3:20PM

Just the kind of BS the military needs in the middle of two wars. Liberals will be the death of us yet.

God help us!

Moe| 5.28.10 @ 7:52PM

What is forgotten in this foray into military social engineering is that in order for this policy to be rescinded lawmakers will have to redo the UCMJ. I am unsure of the article, but sodomy and other sexual misconduct is a clear and direct violation of the law and the UCMJ. Unless definitions have changed I believe that homosexual sex is still considered sodomy and if so the wholesale revamping of the UCMJ must occur for open homosexuals to serve without violation the military codes of conduct and the UCMJ.

doolitle| 5.29.10 @ 2:33PM

having heard about the "large" number of Arabic speaking linguists who've been forced out of the service because of their sexual orientation, why haven't we also heard about, say, pilots, or nuclear engineers or electronic weapons officers? Is it only "gays" who learn to speak arabic and are thus denied their right to serve? And if they really wanted to serve, couldn't they do so and keep quiet? Or do they prefer to take advantage of their "gayness" to make a point and thus be discharged? Do they want to serve their country or their agenda?

mike davis| 5.29.10 @ 8:02PM

I'm not an American, I'm Australian. However I served in the Israeli army (I'm also not Jewish) in the 1970s and there were guys with me in my unit who were gay. Everyone knew (one of them was an officer) and nobody cared. 1970s, remember. There were no crises in the showers or any fantasies like this. The unit was not damaged and we all did our jobs properly. There was no intra-unit violence, abuse or stress. We all got along well.
The Australian Army also got rid of this hang up about who Corporal Jones is sleeping with, off duty, in the mid 1990s. (The Americans haven't asked us to leave Afghanistan because of the presence of gay soldiers in our forces there.Why?)

Why can't so many Americans get passed this? The US Army survived the end of racial segregation in 1948, an act proposed by American liberals and opposed by American conservatives like your readership.. Is it also posssible that your fine Army will also survive the end of this silliness about private sexual matters in 2010?

Righty13| 1.27.11 @ 11:51AM

Mike,
I agree with most of your comment. I am EXTREMELY grateful for anyone who decides to fight for my country and to stand up against the evils across this world. I don't care if they are male, female, homosexual, heterosexual, Christian, Jewish, Agnostic, black, white, orange, purple... whatever. I don't know anyone in their right mind who would care as long as the job is getting done. I see two problems at work here. One problem is that SOME homosexuals expect special treatment so they go around waving their flag to get it. The second problem is that all homosexuals are being lumped together in generalities, even though plenty of homosexuals are there to get the job done and ARE getting it done without complaint. The odd thing is that this is not a new "problem." It has been happening for centuries. Here is a great link about the history of gays in the military:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article CAAS /0,8599,1958246,00.html

BSDN| 5.30.10 @ 12:54AM

Yo Mike,
It's called don't ask, don't tell for a reason. As long as you do your job, the inquisition will not be knocking on your door.
But the homosexuals aren't happy with that. They want special rights and approval of their practices.

But if we are going to really honest about it, then the heterosexuals should also be able to shower and sleep with their girlfriends if the homosexuals can shower and sleep with their boyfriends.

IOW why have any sexual distinctions or segregation at all in the services. Throw 'em all in the blender. Coed barracks/room mates, bathrooms and showers for one and all.
Stands to reason.

mike davis| 5.30.10 @ 3:15AM

Silly jumble of words. This is a serious matter try and be serious. (I am not asking you BSDN whether you have actually served in uniform .. I am assuming you have as it would be silly of you to talk about this if you have not. Like me commenting on climbing Mount Everest.) No one sleeps with anyone on base (marrieds excepted) and you know that. What happens now is that disturbed anti-gay army people look around to find those who are gay. They stoke situations with comments, suggestions, innuendo... you know the drill and the types who do it. Why do they do it? Officers and soldiers who are gay do not run around at work like the Village People, you know that. Why do you think otherwise? These guys are trying to build lives and careers without suddenly having everything wrecked by some low life who sees them having a quiet (maybe even ..how terrible! .. romantic)dinner with some other guy with whom they may be seriously involved. Then the stories start from the low life ... and then the careers get ruined. Why?
DADT applies to the gay soldier ... but what about the low life gay hater who is determined to get Corporal Jones? What is the law he has to obey?

Truthyness| 5.30.10 @ 3:30PM

I don't really have a problem with gays serving openly in principle, except that I worry about the lawsuits. There will be some gay activists who start suing the military for other things like recognition of marriage. There will be lawsuits over harassment (is calling anyone a sissy now an offense).

This at least in part is an effort to get gay marriage in the "backdoor" so to speak. So while I tend to agree with repeal supporters in principle, I worry about the consequences.

Edgard DeBRUYCKER| 5.30.10 @ 9:59AM

I read some" pro" and most" cons" covering just about any situation, yet no one sofar has considered the following: Many countries have harsh laws against this depravity, long jail sentences, hangings, beheadings. Now asume the US Military is called to protect or intervene in some of these countries. Will the gays be pulled from going "in harms way" and have someone else take their place? What if they get caught dilly dallying with the native kids,will the goverment call for a special "SOFA" status protecting their deviants? It is a can of worms; why just let things go on as it is working now, serve quitly and discreetly and avoid a lot of hasles. What do they want? A yellow donkey badge like the star of David the jews were ordered to wear in Germany on the way to the slaughter houses? ed

Truthyness| 5.30.10 @ 3:34PM

I don't think being gay would give you a protected status in the army to commit pedophile acts, but I do see a whole lot of lawsuits coming, especially with marriage. What happens to the spouse of the gay guy or gal? Equal treatment for everything will be demanded.

Yosemeti Sam| 5.31.10 @ 1:33AM

" House Votes to Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ...."

Um, HR democrats including 5 RINOs:

Legislative fanfare for the common ponce!

Democrats will get it in the end - come November!

mike davis| 5.31.10 @ 6:03AM

Mr. de Bruyker should know that many American servicemen who are christians encountered the problem he mentions when they are in Saudi Arabia. That country is murderously opposed to christianity andso all christian religious services for US servicemen are problematic in Arabia.

The problem is overcome with a little bit of commonsense. The same will happen with all aspects of organising the final calming down of the 'gay soldier drama' and the US Army drops any concern about who Corporal Jones sleeps with, off duty. Some may use words like 'depravity' but strangely that is not a word that many servicemen think of when they think of their same sex partner of 5/10/15+ years standing. Is it possible for AS readers to exercise a tiny little bit of common decency in talking about their fellow Americans? I'm happy to withdraw this call if someone can explain why these soldiers do NOT deserve any common decency.
On the marriage question, no gay soldier can demand anything from the Army concerning marriage that is not allowed by the laws of the US. One can only sue if there is a legal basis ... one can't sue just to get something one may want.
Common sense as well as common decency would be useful in these columns.

Mike M| 5.31.10 @ 9:04AM

When Obama is voted out of office in 2012 we shall name a submarine in his honor, The USS Obama. Fill it with 250 of his "sweetie pie" sailors and dozens of gerbils and let them do whatever they do away from the rest of us all.